Quantum Mechanics - Angular Momentum probability

  • Thread starter Tangent87
  • Start date
  • #1
148
0
See the attachment for the question.

I'm stuck on the bit highlighted in yellow (have done the rest of the question).

I'm not sure if it's really trivial or more involved. Do I have to use the fact that U(pi/2)|j m> are eigenvectors of J1 with eigenvalue m somehow? Why is the answer not just:
|<j m'| J1 |j m>|2?

Thanks
 

Attachments

  • pqm2003.jpg
    pqm2003.jpg
    35.1 KB · Views: 574

Answers and Replies

  • #2
vela
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
15,000
1,574
You don't generally apply the operator when you're making a measurement. Instead, what you do is expand the state of the system in terms of the eigenstates of the observable

[tex]\vert j m \rangle = \sum_{m' = -j}^j c_{m'} \vert j m' \rangle_{J_1}[/tex]

(where [itex]\vert j m' \rangle_{J_1}[/itex] are the eigenstates of J1) and then pick off the coefficients (taking advantage of the orthonormality of the eigenstates) and square them to calculate the probabilities.
 
  • #3
148
0
You don't generally apply the operator when you're making a measurement. Instead, what you do is expand the state of the system in terms of the eigenstates of the observable

[tex]\vert j m \rangle = \sum_{m' = -j}^j c_{m'} \vert j m' \rangle_{J_1}[/tex]

(where [itex]\vert j m' \rangle_{J_1}[/itex] are the eigenstates of J1) and then pick off the coefficients (taking advantage of the orthonormality of the eigenstates) and square them to calculate the probabilities.


Ah yes of course! I've done it now, cheers.
 

Related Threads on Quantum Mechanics - Angular Momentum probability

  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
499
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Top